Newt Gingrich Apparently Still Running, Obama Just Loves Those Jobs Numbers, Afghanistan Faces Big Challenges After U.S. Leaves: P.M. Links


  • Insert sound of crickets, here

    My campaign isn't dead yet, insists Newt Gingrich.

  • Obama says he's thrilled about not-so-thrilling jobs numbers.
  • Afghanistan may not be quite poised to thrive after the U.S. pulls out.
  • New Mexico mayoral election results in an empty office after the winner runs into a little trouble involving blackmail and lap dances.
  • Same-sex marriage may get a boost in Maryland, courtesy of a divorce case.
  • British granny bounced from doctor's office because her two-mile roundtrip drive makes Mother Earth cry.

Do you want hot links and other Reason goodies delivered to your inbox twice a day? Sign up here for Reason's morning and afternoon news updates.

NEXT: Debt and Loving It, Fiscal Year 2012 Edition

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. That’s right. Sea level isn’t rising, it’s Mother Earth’s tears welling up.

  2. Stay the course, Newcular Titties, stay the course.

    1. Well, I can’t take him like that. It’s against regulations.

      1. I got better.

        (oops, wrong scene)

        1. That is incorrect. There is no “wrong” scene from that movie. Also, that quote was too perfect not to use.

  3. Stand your ground case in Seattle?:

    She and her family got off the bus at Third Avenue and Seneca Street. Salters stayed on. Brereton and some of her family made obscene gestures at him. He demanded to get off the bus.
    He walked toward Brereton asking, “What did you say?”
    She told him to get away. When he was within 20 feet, she displayed her pistol. She had a concealed weapons permit.
    But Salters kept coming, getting to within a foot or two of her. He started spitting at her.
    Brereton shot him once in the chest.

    The statement released Tuesday said that “there is strong evidence in this case that she reasonably believed under the facts and circumstances known to her at the time that Salters was about to injure her. … Although she may have made obscene gestures, she did not initiate the physical confrontation. However, Mr. Salters did by charging at her.”
    Prosecutors said she didn’t use unnecessary force and brandished her weapon to stop Salters.
    “Under state law, Brereton has no duty to retreat. She can reasonably take into account her inability to use her gun to defend herself if Salters got close enough to physically assault her and be concerned that she could lose the gun in a struggle.”

    1. Needs more RACISM!!!!!

    2. So now if you even think someone else might start a fight, you can shoot them dead?

      In the Zimmerman threads people were arguing with me about whether Martin could defend himself against Zimmerman if Zimmerman threateningly told him to stop.

      Apparently not only could he do that, he could defend himself even if Zimmerman just walked over. At least, in Seattle he could.

      Oh wait this is probably a white woman. I forgot.

      1. Have you ever taken Seattle mass transit, Fluffy? Do you have any idea the kind of muttering, screaming, furtive gesturing, sudden violent movement kind of people that are on there?

        I don’t really know the particulars on this case, but I can tell you this: I figure if I ever end up having to pull my gun on someone in Seattle, it will probably not be a mugger or thief; it will be a hobo/bum. There are an amazing number of them here, and a lot of them are aggressive.

        1. All I am saying is that if someone running over to you can be regarded as so inherently threatening (even in the absence of a specific verbal threat or any physical contact) that you can use lethal force in response and get away with it, then that should mean that it doesn’t matter if Zimmerman or Martin started the fight, in our other long-running dispute on this subject.

          Had Martin been carrying, he could have shot Zimmerman dead as soon as Zimmerman approached, and gotten off scot-free. Right?

          1. Right Fluffy, it’s so much better for Epi to have a rabid, Hep C carrying bum scratch and molest the shit out of him so then Epi can protect himself with lethal force, as opposed to making it known “Look hobo, you are approaching and I don’t like it. I’m armed. Keep away.”

            Because we know that agressive and possibly mentally ill hobos never have nefarious intent, even in their own little worlds.

          2. I really don’t give a shit about the Zimmerman case now that its only a vehicle for TEAM RED TEAM BLUE bullshit, but yes, if he had some guy furtively pursuing him and then approach him, and if he brandished and the guy kept coming aggressively, Martin would be well in his rights to shoot him.

            And after reading the entire article, I can assure you this was the case of a hobo being aggressive, just from the way it’s written and where they were. They were downtown, right in the middle of what is known as the “ride free zone”. Within the ride free zone, it costs nothing to ride the bus. Obviously, the hobos and bums are everywhere within the ride free zone and the buses are lousy with them. They piss on themselves, are visibly drunk/high, mutter, scream, panhandle, and even assault each other and other people. Their behavior is very erratic and I specifically avoid Third Ave. when walking because of how many hobos there are and how they will constantly aggressively approach you.

            It’s a real problem. I couldn’t even believe how bad it was after I moved here, and I’ve lived in NYC, Baltimore, Stamford, and near Paterson.

          3. Fluffy, this is a specific instance that probably has a lot of details that wouldn’t be present in the hypothetical you describe.

            You’re extrapolating a general principle from a very specific case which you don’t know all the details of.

            1. You can either shoot someone who doesn’t make a verbal threat, or touch you, or you can’t.

              Seattle says you can.

              No verbal threat.

              No physical contact.

              BANG! Dead.

              “But Fluffy, bums are scary and carry diseases!” is not really a legal principle.

              1. You can either shoot someone who doesn’t make a verbal threat, or touch you, or you can’t.

                False dichotomy.

                Those two considerations (was there a verbal threat, was there touching) are not the only possible ones.

                1. Um, no.

                  Those two options take in all possible circumstances.

                  You either can do it, or you can’t.

                  I don’t think you know what a false dichotomy is.

              2. “But Fluffy, bums are scary and carry diseases!” is not really a legal principle.

                You’re right Fluffy. The next time I’m accosted by a hobo running up to me screaming about how he wants a fix and has what I perceive to be a threatening look in his eye I don’t like (which has happened before, by the by), I’ll invite him to tea and tell him my buddy Fluffy said it was cool, and my right to protect my self-ownership and safety is just some nebulous legal principle. Got it.

                1. Groovus, it’s entirely OK by me if we want to adopt a rule that says that if you don’t like the look in the eye of the person who comes up to you, you can kill them.

                  I’m just trying to establish whether this is in fact the rule.

                  Because if it’s the rule, it’s the rule for anyone and everyone, and not just for bums.

              3. Fluffy, if you RTFA, it’s pretty clear that a good bit transpired before the shooting and it wasn’t just a bum running at at her.

                I don’t have a good deal of sympathy for a belligerent person who continues to charge at you and your family after showing a gun and warning to stay away. No doubt that the woman and her family contributed to the escalation, but the guy’s actions were the magic of natural selection at work.

                1. It’s going to get to the point where it will be a crime to defend yourself without fatal results for the attacker.

                  That is, after all, what Democrats want.

      2. Fluffy, have you switched your paymaster from the Koch brothers to the SPLC brothas?

      3. In this case, it sounds reasonable to me to interpret the guy’s behavior as threatening enough to use deadly force. If someone gets that close to you, cursing and spitting, even after you have shown them that you have a gun, I think you are justified in assuming that they mean to harm you.

        1. It is kind of a chicken and egg thing: you shouldn’t brandish a firearm until you’re sure you’re justified in using it.

          One could just as easily argue that failure to back off means they had no intention of harming you and didn’t realize you were brandishing the gun in response to what they were doing.

          1. Yeah. I guess the question is how much of a risk does there have to be before you can brandish or use force. You can never be completely sure that someone intends to kill or hurt you, so there has to be some threshold. Difficult line to draw.

    3. Based on the information presented in the article, and my knowledge of Seattle mass transit, it sounds to me like Brereton was in the right.

      There are so many pieces of shit who ride Seattle metro you could probably kill 200 of them a day and never see the end of them.

    4. I can imagine a scenario where someone “charging” at you would justify getting a shot off while you could.

      And I can imagine a lot of scenarios where somebody with their anger on walking up to you, even though you tell them to stop, would absolutely not warrant putting a bullet in them.

      1. Someone charging at you could quite possibly only reveal their knife or other weapon once they get close enough that you’d have difficulty drawing your firearm.

        Which is one advantage women have…they can grasp a firearm in their purse without risking brandishing charges.

      2. If you keep coming after I’ve brandished the pistol in order to scare you off so that I don’t have to shoot you, now I will shoot you, because something isn’t right here.

        Of course, I won’t have brandished in the first place unless I feel cornered.

        1. Failure to cower in fear at the sight of a gun is not really a legal justification for killing someone.

          As you imply in your final remark, the justification to shoot has to already be present before you brandish.

    5. It is a bit troubling that they said she was afraid that he might “injure” her. That’s usually not sufficient for lethal force.

      A lot depends on the circumstances, but it’s certainly possible that an unarmed person could kill you.

      1. “injure” her.

        You are aware Tulpa, that injur here can include sexual assault, and I submit the perceived threat of rape is going to give women more latitude under a “S.Y.G” law.

        I wonder if this was factored into the legal calculus here.

        1. I wonder if this was factored into the legal calculus here.

          If it wasn’t, it’ll almost certainly help her in front of a jury.

        2. Possibly, but it’s odd that they didn’t state that if that’s what they meant. It’s not the 1950s anymore where we have to make the papers fit for 6 year olds to read.

          1. They don’t have to Tulpa. Remember, all men are potential rapists and should be treated as such and that fact immediately assumed in all cases. Even peanut butter jesters such as yourself.

      2. I was thinking that, too. Plus, what R C Dean said.

    1. Uhh Huh…and evidently reads H&R

  4. The McDonald’s worker who claims she scooped last week’s world record lottery prize is now saying she has lost the winning ticket.…..icket.html

    1. I smell both fraud and McRibs here.

      1. Not ribs. It’s just spam with barbecue sauce on it.

        1. That pretty much describes McRibs, actually.

    1. I can’t believe I’m rooting for Hyperolbermann, for once.

      1. You aren’t rooting for Olber-douche, you are rooting for the demise of Current TV. That’s how that one works. If Olber-douche happens to benefit, bully him.

        1. Whatever works. Truth be told, I’m hoping for mutually assured destruction.

          1. Yeah. It’s like when Nazis and Communists fight: you don’t pick a side, you hope for an asteroid strike.

    2. Keith Olbermann: continueing to set the standard for smug self important douchebags everywhere.

    3. From the link:
      “Olbermann opined to Bohrman that Uygur had difficulty separating facts from things he wanted to be true”

      Olbermann accusing someone else of missing the reality check?!
      Read it; I’m not making this up.

  5. Only Canadian on death row could lose clemency bid before it begins…..le2394153/

  6. Found this through the divorce link.

    Amanda Bynes: Not aging well or plastic surgery?

    Mug shot

    1. Not aging well. As far as invasive procedures, she’s in the clear. She just has drunk puffy face and I would imagine a few other choice chemicals as well. Make up is also cakey too.

      1. The last time I saw her in a tabloid thing she looked like she had gained 60 pounds.

        1. She looks pretty good to me. I should know, too. I use mugshots as dating profiles.

          1. Hey, jail chicks will do anything for bail money.

        2. I noticed she looked a little chunky in Easy A. John should approve.

    2. Amanda Bynes fat times

      I dunno guys, looks pretty big to me. I bet she’s got a lot better at fellatio(because she would have to).

        1. The only thing wrong about that picture is those ridiculous fake glasses.

    3. Legs are pretty nice though.…

    4. And you wonder why fat ugly girls don’t come to H&R anymore.

      Well, that and the primitivism prohibition.

  7. British granny bounced from doctor’s office because her two-mile roundtrip drive makes Mother Earth cry.

    Wow, Britain can’t annihilate itself fast enough.

    1. Give them a break, will you? I think they’re trying as best they can.

    2. Was Orwell right or what?

    3. 2 fucking miles? When I saw this story this morning, I assumed that she must have lived 10 or 20 miles away, at least (in which case it would still be ridiculous). So not only are they stuck with the NHS, but they don’t even get to choose a slightly less crappy office to use.

      1. Yeah, that was a bunch of bullshit. If I couldn’t go to the doctor because I didn’t live within 2 miles, I’d be screwed. Nearest one is at least 5 miles away. Maybe more.

      1. Yes, that’s much better.

        1. lulz

      2. Apathiest: <a href=””>This text will show up in orange</a>

        1. I see SF is now hosting post graduate courses in linking.

      3. You don’t really know what you’re doing, do you?

        1. Nope and I’m drunk on my day off.

          1. Jesus died for you to have the day off… but not me. He only died for my sins, dangit.

  8. Evil, exploitative capitalist class-enemy/Social Darwinist saves African rhino population by privately operating rhino ranch (on second page of story).

    Rather than kill the rhinos like poachers do, he farms them, cuts off the horn just enough so it can grow back, and then sells it to meet the booming demand for rhino horns.

    1. I thought that was a pretty good article. Certainly doesn’t seem opposed to the farming.

      Private game preserves and things like this are the only way African large animals are going to be saved.

    2. Horrible!
      Someone making money; horrible! Can’t have it.

  9. You gotta respect a man who runs a frickin’ rhinocerous ranch.

    1. That’s like a bunny ranch with really fat chicks right?

      1. Hugh has already started researching flights to Zimbabwe.

      2. No, the RINO Ranch controls the house of Representatives.

    1. Yes, when I think of Cork-Carraig, Che Gueverra is the first thing that pops into my noggin.

    2. I read the letter over at Cafe Hayek yesterday. I couldn’t figure out why the fuck Galway would build a monument to Che? I don’t understand the connection. Sounds like more politicians, taking someone else’s money, and building a monument to a hero of central planning. Disgusting.

    3. I read the letter over at Cafe Hayek yesterday. I couldn’t figure out why the fuck Galway would build a monument to Che? I don’t understand the connection. Sounds like more politicians, taking someone else’s money, and building a monument to a hero of central planning. Disgusting.

      1. Ireland needs the stimulus of government building a monument to a mass murderer.

      2. Lets just assume that alcohol is in someway involved. Stereotypes aren’t always untrue.

        1. ^^^ My Irish half finds your joke amusing. My Russian half is in complete agreement. 😉

          1. CHRIST, are you ever sober?

            1. “CHRIST, are you ever sober?”

              Junior: “Hey. pops! You’re the one who lets me turn water into wine! Whadya expect?”

      3. I couldn’t figure out why the fuck Galway would build a monument to Che?

        Because a statue of Oliver Cromwell would have been too tacky?

    4. He should put up a statue of Ian Paisley.

      1. Ian Mackaye is a better choice.

        1. Was Che a heavy partier?

  10. British granny bounced from doctor’s office because her two-mile roundtrip drive makes Mother Earth cry.

    So the UK’s chief export is now cautionary tales about bureaucracy run amok?

    1. In China, her family would kill her doctor:

      Violent Crimes in China’s Hospitals Spread Happiness…..iness.html

  11. This is how much it costs to have a vagina

    They should just do what I do and rent one.

    1. I note the link URL says “own” a vagina. Those objectifying misogynists.

    2. They count shaving in there. Hard to take the other stuff seriously – almost certain they pick the maximum possible cost for each item.

      1. Also, it’s not necessary to use contraception unless one is sexually active. Even in case of rape, you can trade a Plan B for twenty years of pills. It’s certainly not necessary to use a condom and the pill. If you’re worried about disease, you may need to reconsider your choice in partners (guys too).

        1. I also noticed that the birth control cost (inflated by taking the most expensive option only necessary for a tiny subset of women):

          $129.99 a pack at 13 packs per year: $1689.87

          was rendered redundant by the following:

          $17.99 per box of 36 at, at 2 boxes per year:$35.98

          1. It’s like saying “I need to get to work” and budgeting for a Rolls and driver because, hey, some people do it.

            1. Given the 72 condoms they are accounting for a year, it doesn’t appear that they are doing it.

              1. Ms. Fluck says, “I can go through that many just on a Monday.”

          2. Gents, you do realize for the exorbitant prices claimed on birth control to be accurate, IUD’s fit the bill. I haven’t read the article, but I have the sneaking suspicion the IUD is the 800 lb gorilla in the room here. Damn effective and damn expensive. And generally not covered in insurance policies, since much less expensive alternatives exist.

            1. I don’t care what they use, but they don’t get to bitch when they’re needlessly spending more. I evaluate cost proposals as part of my job; if one came in like theirs I’d fucking shred it.

            2. Nope, the $1689.97 they are claiming is for a birth control pill.

              1. birth control can cost a woman up to $129.99 per pill pack.

                By their own admission they’re using the most expensive type they can.

              2. I just looked on my Script PDA (yes, they still have those) and none, I repeat none of the birth control pills cost anywhere that much, except for two, and those are for very specific cases and should be IMO very narrowly prescribed.

                1. The article explicitly states that there are specific cases where you can require only expensive versions of the pill. Then it uses those prices for the price that all women will pay.

                  1. Then it uses those prices for the price that all women will pay.

                    80% of woman are not at risk for oophritis, much less ovarian cancer and endometriosis. Just because you have one, doesn’t mean you are going to develop a problem with one. I’m calling severe bullshit here.

                    1. A decade ago, the daughter of a friend of mine who was in college then told me she asked her dad to pay for her pills. He told her she needed to take absolute responsibility for her sex life. She pleaded it was for regulation of menstrual cycle to prevent ovarian cancer. I asked her, was this the recommendation of her doctor. The air got frosty. I sounded just like her dad according to her.

                    2. She pleaded it was for regulation of menstrual cycle to prevent ovarian cancer.

                      The rates of women who experience chronic amenorrhea, menorrhagia, and polymenorrhea are a very small percentage of women who are overall at risk overall of ovarian cancer d/t ovarian cysts. Ovarian cysts are DX’d via ultasound then followed up with an endoscopy/hysteroculposcopy and birth control pills RX’d for ovarian cancer prophylaxis are wasting their money. Regulation of periods are fine, provided that the menses are “off”, but every once in while two days late in the absence of intercourse does not constitute an absolute DX of ovarian cancer.

                    3. And health insurance, which most women have, will pay for it if the woman has a medical need.

                    4. Not even necessary, as there is a Planned Parenthood or an equivalent (Medicaid provider or equivalent) in just about every town or city for hardship cases. That’s right, CMS will pay for this stuff if you qualify.

                      “Access” is a bogus argument.

            3. My wife has an IUD and I believe it cost about $800 (no insurance) and lasts for 5-7 years.

              1. My wife has an IUD and I believe it cost about $800 (no insurance) and lasts for 5-7 years.

                But requires periodic checkup (at least every six months, every 3 to months recommended) to make sure the IUD hasn’t shifted or dislodged; those office visits cost money.

                Biggest advantages of an IUD are its spectacular success rate, safety, and nil cancer risk from birth control pills (yes certain types of cancer actually increase with a birth control regimen). Also, as you point out, it can reside in the uterus for a long time.

                1. “…every 3 to 4 months recommended, or at your doctor’s direction…”

        2. Plan B is not a contraceptive, it’s an abortifacient.

          1. I don’t entirely agree, but how is that relevant?

      2. What blows my mind every time I go to the gym is how many men of my generation still do absolutely zero manscaping. Considering how rare it is to encounter a female who doesn’t follow the scorched earth policy, how do so many dudes still have giant fucking africa bushes?

        1. Maybe for the same reason most guys don’t paint their toenails?

          1. double plus! I’m not going to shave my privies. That is fucking vain.

            1. It doesn’t necessarily have to be shaving, and it doesn’t have to be vanity. Girls usually don’t want hair in their teeth.

              1. You’ve been around women enough to know this. If you treat them like princesses, they’ll walk all over you. Won’t hurt a bit that they get a little flossing in while taking care of your business. Consider it multitasking.

                Besides, ever been with a girl who didn’t shave more than once a week? Ever get the inside of your nose scraped? Hurts don’t it? Prefer to get hairs in my mouth from a woman who doesn’t shave than to deal with rug burn.

                1. I’m not even trumpeting shaving. I much prefer just keeping it trimmed.

              2. It doesn’t necessarily have to be shaving, and it doesn’t have to be vanity. Girls usually don’t want hair in their teeth.

                Oral sex. That’s funny. You are obviously unmarried.

            2. You don’t have to shave all your junk. I find that condoms go on and come off easier if I trim the sideburns, however.

              1. I guess it depends on the growth pattern whether you should do it or not. The second Harold & Kumar movie had an extreme example of a guy with a full crotch beard. Then again, he was Persian, if I remember. I’m just a scrappy Latin with dark but short curlies all over my chest and groin.

                1. I wanna get my genome sequenced. I have a sneaking suspicion that I’ve got an unusually high amount of neanderthal genes. I wear short sleeves in 50 degree weather and have a natural coat (or would if I didn’t keep it trimmed).

                  Gotta side with Auric here. Trimming is necessary for some people. Full on smooth as a baby is a different matter.

        2. It’s too expensive. A pair of scissors is like $5 and only lasts for a lifetime.

        3. Well, see, some men are gay. Some men want to be women.

        4. I am definitely vain. The cleanliness=gay argument is so middle school.

          Also, there is a wide range of possibility between waxed/shaved smooth and gigantic, completely untrimmed bush.

          1. Absolutely not gay or womanly.

          2. Odd thing. I know a lot of metrosexuals who are that way because they are horny heterosexual club hoppers who are bending to the will of the female clique of those establishments and their bent social structure. So, I don’t think it is gay of you at all.

            I just hate club culture with a passion. Think it has past its prime in deserving massive ridicule.

            1. I’m definitely not a fan of clubs. I’m pretty convinced that no one actually has a good time at clubs, they just keep going because they think they are supposed to.

              1. People who are on Ecstasy or coke probably have a good time at clubs. I can’t imagine how otherwise.

    3. I assume the purpose of this list is to argue that other people, mainly penis bearers, need to pay for their vagina care given it is all so unfair and stuff?

      I assume they don’t take this to mean they are obligated to share the wares to all penis bearers who politely ask for a little nookie payback?

      A lot of assumptions built into this without actually reading it, but I’m curious to how right or wrong they are before I plunge in the Hell that is Jeze-territory.

      1. I assume the purpose of this list is to argue that other people, mainly penis bearers, need to pay for their vagina care given it is all so unfair and stuff?

        I don’t know; was this penned by Sandra (appropriately named) Fluke?

        1. I can’t make my self go over to Jeze to find out. I’m a sadist not a masochist.

      2. They seem to be treating a vagina strictly as a cost center. Which is odd, given that many women leverage their vagina into, if not an actual cash generator, at least a way to lay off their overhead onto someone else.

        1. It’s only fair to use Hollywood actress rates, given the cost estimating rules they used.

          1. One guy I’m acquainted with swears that he bought a fairly well known actress for a night of strenuous leisure activities. I wont mention her name cause he was probably lying. But 7500 seems a lot of money for one night’s worth of poon. You could set up a grad student in a comfortable apartment for a year and hit it multiple times a week for that price.

            1. I wasn’t even talking about actual sex, just the display of sexuality on screen that’s part of their jobs.

              1. There was enough commonalities there for me to run with my story.

                1. Oh, it works, and we’re all richer for it. I was just amplifying.

                  1. Thanks! I mean ‘strenuous leisure activities’! I patted my own back twice and shook my head side to side in an air of smug self satisfaction over coming up with that one. It made up for a week’s worth of homophones and a noun verb agreement error somewhere up above in this very thread all in one stroke.

        2. They seem to be treating a vagina strictly as a cost center.

          How exactly do breasts factor in this economic scheme?

          1. Yes. They’re billboards for the vagina.

            1. There’s a Burma Shave joke in there somewhere.

              1. If your clam’s got a beard.

                1. If you need your land cleared.

                  1. If you want that vulva.

                    1. To not be called Mulva.

                    2. Burma Shave!

              2. Head on south / Don’t look behind ya / Warm and wet / In some / Vagina / Burma-Shave

                1. Stuff on the top shelf / Heavy boxes of mags / Too much to do yourself / Show him your fun bags / Burma Shave

                  1. Bouncing left / Bouncing right / Pinch the nipples / Stay the night / Burma-Shave

                    1. If your nethers
                      Offends your man
                      Make it smooth
                      Like a teflon frying pan
                      Burma Shave

                    2. If your muff
                      Is feeling tough
                      And your lad
                      Has got a sad
                      Burma Shave

    4. They forgot to add back in all the free drinks. I suspect you’d end up with a net positive the way taxes on alcohol and bar markup is going.

      Of course these free drinks aren’t coming from me. I don’t believe in paying people to hang out with me.

      1. I have a big “free drink” expense built into my budget monthly. Oh the joys of being a single 20-something male.

        1. I’ve never once bought a drink for a woman I didn’t actually know. Happily married for seven years now, so it’s not like it hasn’t worked out for me.

          1. The drinks for someone I don’t know are by far the minority. Most of it goes to first dates or being out with my broke sister and her friends.

            1. Actually I don’t think I’ve bought a drink for someone I didn’t know since my cruise In December.

              1. I had a girl buy me a drink once at karaoke. True story – I believe in a thing called love (The Darkness) is pretty much a guaranteed crowd pleaser if you have the falsetto for it.

                1. I had Miss Austin (TX) buy me a couple rounds of tequila. Then I made out with her friend.

                  1. I think you win. Unless the friend was of the big fat variety, making you the nondiscriminating friend?

                    Nah, you still win.

                  2. Nice.

                    And what year?

                    1. This happened in 2009, so a year or two before that was when she was in the pageant.

                2. I agree whole-heartedly.

    5. I love this: That being said, birth control can cost a woman up to $129.99 per pill pack. Because they are taken daily like vitamins and not simply whenever a woman has sex like Viagra, a woman goes through a pill pack every 28 days. So this is actually what Sandra Fluke meant when she testified that it would set back law students $3000 over the course of law school if insurance didn’t help defray the cost of birth control.

      $129.99 a pack at 13 packs per year: $1689.87

      Would it be too much to ask them to do basic fucking math? $1690 =/= $3000
      Jesus, Mary, and Joseph

      1. To be far, that’s $3000 over the course of law school, which means multiple years.

        There are plenty of valid objections to their numbers.

        1. far=fair

        2. Yeah, I realized that after I hit submit.

      2. That $1690 is for one year, whereas law scholl takes 3.

        1. However, I have no idea how long law school takes.

    6. $8.81 per 32 oz. bottle of all-natural cranberry juice at

      Who the fuck buys juice from

      1. It’s a cost of being a woman. They aren’t allowed in grocery stores because of the patriarchy.

        1. I thought that was one of the few places we allowed them.

      2. People who want the all-natural kind but live in places where it’s hard to find or way jacked up in price. You can get stuff like that from Amazon on a regular delivery schedule and pay no shipping.

    7. Why would women need to use twice the amount of toilet paper as men? I would think the amount you use during a crap would be way more than what you’d use for some pee.

      1. Because women are illogical and just wrap their hands instead of folding the squares as science intended.

    8. Naturally, the longest sub-thread here has to do with vaginas.

      1. There is a hallowed tradition of long things going together with vaginas.

      2. I was definitely not respecting this response from a pun.

        1. expecting

          1. No one expects a response from a pun!

    9. “Birth Control

      Studies show that oral contraceptives have been used by about 80 percent of women in the U.S. at some point in their lives. And it’s a huge expense”

      You know, ladies, your mouth can’t get pregnant.

  12. Holy shit.

    Avril Mulcahy, 83, was told to address the “green travelling issues” over her journeys from her home in Westcliff-on-Sea, Essex, to the West Road Surgery. The surgery wrote to Mrs Mulcahy, telling her to register with a new GP within 28 days.

    Not enough heads on spikes to keep the professional classes honest.

    1. From the comments, half sense and half jackassery:

      Move to Europe where people have been able to grow up not to be pestered by the brain washed morons in authorities.

      Judging by the waste and litter strewn about, the notion of a carbon footprint is darnright silly as someone on the move has to go around in a van picking the trash up.
      Get things in perspective. The UK with it’s fuel based economy will never be carbon friendly.

      Know a country where the garbage trucks run on solar power? Or, maybe, this highly sophisticated nation in his head has mass transit solar powered trains with trash bins on their routes.

      Hope the guys isn’t dumb enough to mean electric vehicles but he probably does. What does he think supplies the juice for the car batteries? Power plants that run on the farts of mutated two headed brahmin?

  13. British granny bounced from doctor’s office because her two-mile roundtrip drive makes Mother Earth cry.

    Between the weather, the hideous cuisine, and the ever-present nanny/surveillance state, I imagine life in Britain to be a very bleak existence. Still, I’m grateful to them for the steady outflow of stories like this, which serve to remind us that as bad as things are getting here, there’s still a place where it’s much worse.

    1. But…but…FREE HEALTH CARE!

      1. And bangers and mash!

        1. And a steaming mouthful of spotted dick whenever you please. On second thought, I take back all those mean and hurtful things I said about Britain.

          (Yes, it’s SFW)

          1. I was hoping for a link to this movie scene:

    2. Well at least the can console themselves with this: Possibly NSFW

    3. In my imagination, I still like to think of Britain like this:

      (Bob Hoskin’s rant against America starts at 1:50)

  14. The Demon’s Name is Surveillance

    Mechanical compound eye
    Imposed observance. Sentries in the sky
    Vigilant lenses. Objectives belied
    In blackened heavens covertly they hide

    They see you. They see all. They know all indiscretions
    Compiler of your dreams, your indignations
    Following your every single move
    They see you

    All-seeing instrument. Supreme perception
    Omnifocal accumulator
    Thief of integrity. Its gaze upon the blind
    Information divinity by man designed

    The lives of all they occupy. Their eyes in dismal gloom
    The all-piercing, dead oculi – mirrors of our doom
    Oblivious to the trespass as you gaze into the black
    The demon of surveillance insultingly staring back
    – Into you

    1. (Cont)

      They own your every secret, your life is in their files
      The grains of your every waking second sifted through and scrutinized
      They know your every right. They know your every wrong
      Each put in their due compartment – sins where sins belong

      They know you. They see all. They know all indiscretions
      Compiler of your dreams, your indignations
      Following your every single move
      They know you

        1. Pithy isn’t the point in anything Meshuggah does.

          It’s all raw power and in your face. They want you to know how much they hate whatever they’re talking about.

  15. I propose a friendly wager between Gingrich and Santorum; a gentleman’s bet if you will: if Rick loses, he has to titty-fuck Newt. If Newt loses, he has to get titty-fucked by Rick.

    Either way, the rest of us win.

    1. C’mon, there’s only one way Santorum should be fucked.

      1. OK, I’ll change it up: Cincinnati Bowtie.

  16. “Obama says he’s thrilled about not-so-thrilling jobs numbers.”

    At least he didn’t call them marvelous.

  17. I know we’re all tired of this but this comment really summs it up:

    J Aaron Hager Thu 05 Apr 2012 1:58 PM
    Black teen shot and killed by hispanic adult male = National discussion over white entitlement.…..von-martin

    Only in America, right folks?

    1. But, of course. If the focus was on black/Hispanic relations, that would certainly fracture democrats in November. The press knows what they are doing here. No reason to second guess their logic, they are professionals, after all.

  18. First week of registration is ending, and I think we can all agree it has improved the site dramatically.

    1. I’m holding judgement until after the weekend.

    2. But what about P Brooks?

      1. There were bound to be casualties. But I’m not ready to declare him KIA.

        1. Not to get pussified, but I miss him and his “Krugabes” and snarky commentary.

      2. What happened to P Brooks, anyway?

        1. Shot by a racist white woman, in all likelihood.

          1. Or molested by a hobo. Probably being tested for Hep C even as we speak.

        2. We only presume that his stand against threaded comments extends to registration as well.

          Or he could be out bowling for a week.

          1. JW|4.6.12 @ 7:09PM|#
            “We only presume that his stand against threaded comments extends to registration as well.”

            You could also mention that the registration process isn’t quite ready for prime time.
            Maybe P B figured it wasn’t worth the effort.

    3. Easy to say when you didn’t lose your name to Reason’s failure to recognize a non-functioning email address.

      1. Tulpa, I mailed you intructions on how to fix that. I noticed a lack of “thank you for the suggestion”, “fuck you”, or “drop dead.” So my sympathy is a bit limited.

        1. Oh, I rarely check this email either. Thx.

          1. Your welcome.

      2. Your own fault, and I consider your annoyance a feature, not a bug.

    4. Gigantic improvement in every way.

  19. Twins have different skin tones.

    Turns out that since both parents have mixed-race genes, that resulted in one girl inheriting all-white genes and the other all-black genes. Experts say the odds of that happening are approximately a million to one.

    1. I have another explanation. And it has much better odds.

    2. The dark one is prettier and more petite. But the hair is certainly very similar.

  20. Another atheist knows his bible better than the thumpers:…..cs&id=2572

    Go to the site and hover your mouse over the red button.

  21. Hah! Emanuel Cleaver (Team Blue) owes $1.5 million… fuckin’ deadbeat.…..d=14966342

  22. Can the President please focus in REAL issues? Instead, of his made-up “issues,” such as the “war on women.”

  23. my best friend’s mother got paid $13652 the prior week. she is making money on the computer and bought a $432200 condo. All she did was get fortunate and put in action the advice laid out on this link(Click on menu Home more information)

  24. About the Che statue in Ireland:

    Che has an ancestor from Galway. According to Wikipedia, Patrick Lynch migrated to Argentina from Galway and became a large landowner in Argentina.

    1. Well that explains the connection. Does not change that that, if anything, should be a reason for shame rather than pride.

  25. my neighbor’s mother-in-law earned $21074 last month. she makes money on the computer and moved in a $587000 home. All she did was get lucky and work up the tips leaked on this site (Click on menu Home more information)

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.